The Audit Retention Decision in the Face of Deregulation: Evidence from Large Private Canadian Corporations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examine the demand for audited financial statements in the context of deregulation. In 1994 a change in Canadian legislation eliminated a mandatory requirement for certain private companies to file audited financial statements. The objective of this research was to determine the importance of factors that might influence whether the audit is discontinued. Information was obtained from the Cancorp Plus database and through a survey of companies affected by the change in legislation. It was found that a large majority of the companies retained their audit. The strongest predictors of whether the audit would be retained were the prior existence of a lending agreement requiring audited financial statements and the level of audit fees. The likelihood of retention was positively related to the magnitude of fees, perhaps reflecting the perceived benefits of the audit. The existence of a lending agreement was found to be influenced by the ownership level of the entity's officers and directors. This study underlines the importance of audited financial statements to lenders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.089 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it